Once the sappy warm-ups were over, Sarah Palin hit her stride. She is good when talking about what she did in Alaska. I can see why she has an 80% approval rating. The frequent interruptions for cheering, however, are annoying.

She's not as polished as Joe Biden, but she's much more straightforward in her speech patterns and (to me) she comes off as more genuine.

So as public speakers, I'd rate Obama way ahead of the other three, McCain at the bottom, and Biden and Palin in the middle (with very different styles). In debates, I don't know how they would rank, but I would be surprised if Palin is as good as the other three.

I was VERY impressed by the speech she just gave. She can do that part of the job well. Not clear to me that Obama is "way ahead" of her, though he's the best of the pack. But this was much better than I had expected.

Mrs. Hoosier, who has NOT signed on to "Catholics for McCain," called me to say "Obama has a problem." I tend to agree, IF she can do the other parts of the job--interviews and debates--well.

At this point, I can't say if she can or cannot. So I'm still thinking this is very risky for McCain. But to be generous on her first day as veep-nominee-designate, she gave a very good speech.

I just looked at the Hillary Clinton Forum that a previous poster alluded to. They are raving about Palin and furious at BO.
Are these just a bunch of kooky bitter-enders or are they in some important way indicative of the way Hillary supporters will vote in November?

You have to admit that Sarah Palin is pretty hot (remember she was in the Ms. Alaska Pageant) and MUCH BETTER on the eyes than Joe Biden. Oh and wait until you see the bikini pics!!! NOT BAD for a mother of 5.

Palin seems like a solid, direct young woman, who will relate well to a certain part of the electorate. However, she is a good match for disaffected Hillary fanatics only in terms of sharing similar chromosomes. She clearly does not share most of the same views on social issues that pulled Hillary voters to her side.

Palin is also decidedly not "presidential." She looks like an assertive and self-assured PTA president (which I think was actually part of her bio). I have seen people like this perform very well on local school boards and city councils, but she will have to show a lot more maturity going forward to convince me that this is someone who should be president.

This choice makes it clear that McCain was looking for someone to complement him (and compliment him), but not for someone to replace him any time soon. McCain was beaming from ear-to-ear as he stood next to Palin on stage, basking in the fawning behavior of a young, energetic woman. I couldn't tell if he was afraid to leave her side or if he just stayed up there because he was enjoying the adulation so much.

The selection of Palin has made things interesting, but it is the kind of self-indulgent risk-taking that does not increase my confidence in McCain's judgment. We already have had to endure one gunslinging cowboy in the White House, and we don't need to elect another one.

I'll admit that Gov. Palin will have to prove herself to me and other voters. However, she DID prove herself the voters of Alaska and to McCain and his campaign staff. I'd think both would do a thorough vetting job on her.

As to going head-to-head with Biden, she'll give straightforward, honest answers. Biden will blow smoke, clever smoke yes, but smoke. I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds Biden irritating and pretentious.

As to PUMAs who might cross-over, what does that tell you about their focus on issues? Or are they Hillarites because of gender identity only? I'll bet a substantial percent are motivated by the latter and will happily vote GOP now. Down ticket GOPers probably won't see much coat tails though.

It is possible, as Quayle did, to win the Vice Presidency without being qualified.

It is not, however, an asset to not be qualified.

Conservatives may have found some keys under their street lamp, but I would suggest to you that having an unqualified pro-lifer in the second slot on the ticket and losing the election is much worse for your cause than having a pro-choicer in that slot and winning it.

"Conservatives may have found some keys under their street lamp, but I would suggest to you that having an unqualified pro-lifer in the second slot on the ticket and losing the election is much worse for your cause than having a pro-choicer in that slot and winning it."

I doubt McCain would have chosen her if she didn't fulfill the qualifications stipulated in the Constitution. What others did you have in mind? Careful, there's a presidential candidate here to consider...

Frankly, I'm very excited to have someone from outside the Ivy/Beltway axis.

As for abortion, I see the dynamics moving as much away from marriage restriction (hurting Palin mildly, her party moreso) as toward pro-life positions, especially backed up by those with the courage of their convictions.

This is the result, ironically, of the rights inflation evidently inevitable in a liberal polity (not that that's a bad thing), coupled with the technological advances that both make the life in the womb more visible and defects more detectable, raising justified liberal qualms with selective termination of those lives based on those defects.